Founders of Freemasonry?

[circuitrider]

Which 'church' has done that? Cordially, Skip.

Quite a few Skip.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

fr..msnry is like c.th.lcsm, there's beleivers and unbelievers inside.
recently in the usa, fr..msns slashed the tires of others who spoke openly about them and the 'religion' those fr..msns practiced contrary to Scripture.
this type of activity is not rare - for either frmsns or cthlcs or almost any religion.

there's a man in town who claims frmsns built the temple .... all the way back then...he had other very very strange ideas also.. from the frmsns he has heard from or wherever he heard it.....

in any case, like other religions, the higher or farther one looks and gets into it, the more troubling things may be found (doesn't even have to be a religion... in the government, in the nave, in the arme, in corporastions..... ) all the heirarchies man has erected.....

 

[Albion]

fr..msnry is like c.th.lcsm, there's beleivers and unbelievers inside.

That's seems a fair observation.

recently in the usa, fr..msns slashed the tires of others who spoke openly about them and the 'religion' those fr..msns practiced contrary to Scripture.
this type of activity is not rare - for either frmsns or cthlcs or almost any religion.

there's a man in town who claims frmsns built the temple .... all the way back then...he had other very very strange ideas also.. from the frmsns he has heard from or wherever he heard it.....

in any case, like other religions, the higher or farther one looks and gets into it, the more troubling things may be found (doesn't even have to be a religion... in the government, in the nave, in the arme, in corporastions..... ) all the heirarchies man has erected.....

You can be suspicious of organizations, but that's quite an unnecessarily gloomy view of life, IMO, to think that every human association is necessarily corrupt, even if we can't identify the corruptions

But if we accept the point for purposes of discussion, wouldn't the religions of those posters here who are the most vocal in their opposition to Masonry be better examples than Freemasonry?

After all, it has been argued here by those who are against Masonry that Masonry does NOT bind the beliefs of the membership but, rather, allows a diversity of belief. That's exactly why the members of totalitarian and supremacist religious sects hate Masonry. The Masons are not forced into accepting any "official" definition of religious belief other than members must already believe in monotheism and the immortality of the soul. The critics are outraged at that.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

yhvh never allows a diversity of beliefs.(in ekklesia, for eternal life)
the religions here are not necessarily any better, if that's what you mean.

 

[Albion]

yhvh never allows a diversity of beliefs.(in ekklesia, for eternal life)
the religions here are not necessarily any better, if that's what you mean.

There's only one truth, I agree.

 

[Skip Sampson]

It does not.

Well, actually some Masonic GLs do:

We are men who believe in a Supreme Being, but may call Him by many names: God, Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, or the Great Spirit. Religious Tolerance has been a hallmark of Masonry from its inception. (Minnesota GL website, 2010)

Many other GL's make a statement like this:

Masons believe that there is one God and that people employ many different ways to seek and to express what they know of God.

Which pretty much equates them all.

Beyond the obvious, that Freemasonry (excepting Simpleman25) does not care about a candidate's religious views beyond his belief in a 'supreme being,' the implication is that they are all ok; thus, a man taking a character from a Bruce Willis movie as his would meet the Masonic requirement for membership in that section.

That Freemasonry equates all gods, true and false, is clear and irrefutable, IMHO. Cordially, Skip.

 

[circuitrider]

Sorry, but I agree with H.W. Coil on that matter. But if you wish to send along a definition of 'religion' from an authoritative source, I'll be happy to try to show you how Freemasonry fits that definition. Oh, no: the Wizards of Smart are against me; I'm sure you include yourself among such men. Well, at least I know what fundamentalists believe, so there's something in my favor. On the other hand, there are probably quite a few people with the same qualifications you noted that do see such a problem.

But I will admit that I do not have the degrees many theologians have, nor do I put long lists of academic credentials after my name to stroke my ego. I have quite a few years of education, though, but I don't let them make a fool of me as others have done. I think I'll just let the readers, at least those who are not already biased, decide just how accurate I am in my commentary.Not surprising. It kinda explains your earlier statement:Since they have done no studies on the matter, that would explain why no statement of oppositions exist. So we can take your protestations in such matters as merely personal opinions, not facts. Cordially, Skip.

Skip, some how you have added 1+1 and come up with 5 and shown you don't understand United Methodist doctrine in the process. If the UMC does not have a position on the issue and such a position does not contradict our doctrinal standards then decisions about such an issue are left to the individual conscience.

Your chalking that up to my personal opinion misses the mark. As an Elder in the UMC I have been trained in and instructed in the doctrines of my Church and have the responsibiility of teaching them. So when I say the UMC has no official position on Freemasonry I say so as a UMC Elder who is required to know and uphold our doctrine. It is not my personal opinion, it is based on what the Discpline of the Church does and does not say.

As to educational requirements, I won't apoligize for the fact that the UMC has educational standards for ordination.

I know there are churches where anyone can walk through the doors with no training or education in Bible or theology and manage to get themselves ordained. I'm glad we are not one of those Churches.

 

[circuitrider]

By the way, Rhamiel, I didn't respond to your assertian earlier that the UMC is wrong about something because it goes without saying that the UMC and Roman Catholicism do not agree 100%. So I'd hardly expect you to agree with everything I believe. Nor would you be surprised to know that I don't agree with a number of teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

[circuitrider]

Albion,

It is a version of the "darned if you do, darned if you don't" argument. It is the same argument as "If you are a 32nd degree Mason you can't know because you don't have the 33rd." "If you are a 33rd we can't believe you because you've now been compromised by an unknown evil we just made up."

 

[Simpleman25]

The only unknown evil I've witnessed during 33rd degree programs are the long winded speeches that some think they have to give. The worst evil is usually the choice of entree.

 

[circuitrider]

The only unknown evil I've witnessed during 33rd degree programs are the long winded speeches that some think they have to give. The worst evil is usually the choice of entree.

LOL, I'm not surprised. Now it is that super super secret 34th degree you really have to watch out for.

 

[Simpleman25]

My 33rd was actually a lot of fun. The entrée was steak or steak with potato.

 

[circuitrider]

My 33rd was actually a lot of fun. The entrée was steak or steak with potato.

I don't have that degree, nor do I know that I ever will of course. 32 Degree KCCH.

 

[Simpleman25]

I won't share on open forum why, but I received mine at a young age compared to most.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Freemasonry never says that all gods are equal. Never. It leaves the question of who God is up to the individual Mason and their own religion. As Albion said, you are either making this stuff up or borrowing falshoods from others.

Please refer to my post #152 for the details behind my own conclusion. You may also wish to read this cite for further proof: http://www.christianforums.com/t7821965/

The unbiased reader may agree or disagree, but I think he'd agree that I've supported my contentions with facts. I'll let Rhamiel speak for himself. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

First you demand that we answer your questions about Masonry. If we choose not to, you claim that we don't know the answers.

That is simply not true..., uh, I mean untrue. To my knowledge, I've never claimed you didn't know the answers. I have pointed out that Masons are extremely reluctant to discuss the issues I've presented, beyond the general statement: 'You are wrong, so there!"

When we do, you accuse of us of "speaking for Freemasonry"

No, in those cases I'm just pointing out the illogic in such actions. You defend yourselves against the words of Coil, Mackey, Roberts and Pike by claiming no one speaks for Freemasonry, then turn right around and speak for Freemasonry. It's comical, in a way, that you do not see the hypocrisy in that.

But since, by your own words, you are not educated in theology or the affairs of the United Methodist Church, and have never been a Mason yourself, most people would not consider it reasonable to automatically dismiss one who is informed about all of that.

Well, you are two for three in that comment. I am educated in theology, but the rest are true. My theological views are everywhere stated in this forum. Feel free to show me where I am wrong. As to the UMC, we already have our self-proclaimed resident expert, so that topic does not need my comments. As to being a Mason, indeed I am not. But if you are saying one must have been a Mason to speak authoritatively about it, you are also saying that Duane Washum is an acceptable source in such discussions. I happen to agree with you that he is.

But one need not be a Mason to discuss Masonic doctrine. I've presented my case, factually based on Masonic authoritative writings and the Masons on this forum have chosen not to factually rebut it. Anyone unbiased can determine for himself how correct I am merely by reading my posts and analyzing the references provided. They can even ask the Masons on this forum about it, but I don't see much in the way of enlightenment coming from such actions. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Albion]

But one need not be a Mason to discuss Masonic doctrine.

That's true. However, you have not been "discussing" anything. You are only repeating hearsay and giving us your own interpretations of various state Masonic organizations' by-laws, along with a few personal attacks that, believe me, don't enhance anyone's credibility.

You admit to not having been trained in research as theologians, clergy, historians, etc. have been, and you freely admit to having no first hand knowledge of Masonry. You are not in the position to be able to "discuss" Masonry, although we're happy to explain to you the history, values, and etc. of Masonry just as we'd do for anyone else on this Philosophy forum.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

JOSEPH live in egypt , a heathen nation that enslaved the israelites and didn't let them go until YHVH did many miracles .

JOSEPH is RIGHTEOUS (according to YHVH's Word/Torah/Scripture).

so,
a man can be a catholic, a republican, democrat, chinese, british, israeli , american, banker, lawyer, priest, pastor, used car salesman, mason, bail bonds man,
and
be right with Yhvh.

that doesn't mean the others in the description are right with Yhvh,
any more than the ones around JOSEPH were. JOSEPH was chosen by Yhvh and remained faithful to Yhvh.

men in all (or almost all) fields and countries and groups can be chosen by Yhvh and can remain faithful to Yhvh.

Yhvh decides... not man.

 

[Supreme]

MOD HAT ON

Thread has undergone clean up. I'd like to bring your attention to the following rules:

Flaming and Harassment
● Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue. Refrain from insulting, inflammatory, or goading remarks. When you disagree, remember to address the content of the post and not the poster personally.

Disruptive Behavior, Campaigning, Staff Disciplinary Action
Maintain the peace and harmony of CF by not rehashing alleged grievances or disputes, publicly complaining about posts, threads, Christian Forums or its staff

If your post was removed, it was either flaming another member or being disruptive to the peace of the site.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Supreme]

mod hat post 162